RoyGBivensAction
Zensunni Scientologist
Married to a tomboy, so I have that going for me, which is nice.
User ID: 3756
Every little bit I've learned about her has led me to conclude that she could tell me it was raining in Seattle and I'd feel the need to check myself.
Congress turning into a vestigial organ that approves a single budget bill once per year and otherwise delegates all its responsibilities to agencies or lets the executive branch usurp them is a process that's been going on for quite some time. With that being said, the conduct of Congress and Trump during this shutdown does seem to be an escalation.
I remember when it was the cool new invite-only service.
Which makes us old as dirt, effectively.
Perhaps compared to civil engineers, lawyers are cooler, but only by that incredibly generous comparison.
Do you have one of those mythical "JD preferred" jobs?
One with an excellent username.
She’s a weird delusional lizard person on blue sky.
A lizard person who goes to incredible lengths to hide her age (she's 40 as of earlier this month).
If you don't recognize any of these names, congratulations, you are winning at life, please avoid contaminating your brain by gaining awareness of their existence.
I only know of Hasan due to Sam Hyde's threat to kill him (in the ring?). The rest are all just gibberish names.
except if they're gay in which case they should stick with just one trap)
It would be selfish for them to have more than one.
ThomasdelVasto asked the question yesterday, and I had been wondering it myself, so I'll ask it here: how many lawyers are on this site?
Faceh, anti_dan, RovScam, and myself are the ones I can think of right away. I believe naraburns has a JD but isn't practicing law. Any others?
I finally sit down to enjoy it all, in this version the farmer shows up with a shotgun and says "these other animals are hungry, you're gonna share half that loaf with them."
Half a loaf? You're quite the optimist that you think you're getting to keep half. I think it more likely that we're going to get the Boxer retirement plan.
Your overall post reminded me of the TW post about the "chump effect." I thought the term was coined by him, but apparently it was the City Journal article he links to.
Stories like the two you pointed out make me feel like quite the chump, as I do most days when I think about these things. I didn't have undergrad debt because I busted my ass in a hard science to maintain grades for my scholarships at a state school. I paid off my law school loans (what a mega-chump move). I drive a 15-year-old paid-off truck. I go to work every day to defend people who are mostly guilty and generally ungrateful. I'm earning a pension, but at best it'll be 60% of the payout that Boomers and Xers are getting from it (thanks to various reforms to keep the system solvent that only took effect long after their benefits were locked in), and that's if I can stick it for another 20 years. So give me that chump jacket, I've earned it.
A bunch of Gen X wander around a government building for a few hours, largely make fools of themselves, and then nothing happens?
I am convinced that the outrage in Congress was a reaction to the immense shame they all felt for blowing the chance of a lifetime: whoever went out and confronted the mob and pulled a calm, collected "have you no shame, have you no decency" response would've been elected President in 2024. Instead, they all ran away, and that knowledge will burn them forever.
Stuff you really want to be kept private can be kept in the groupchat
That does not seem to be working so well lately.
People really do underestimate the GFC right now.
In my corner of the world (government work), I think it's because it didn't impact boomers and older Xers much. They didn't get raises for a few years and their home lost value for a while, but that's about it. They weren't looking for work or getting cut due to a federal sequester (that hit the most recent hires, not the guys who'd been around forever) or going way upside-down on an ARM because of an inflated market, etc. They kept getting paid, kept their houses, and kept working their way towards platinum pensions (which got reformed during the GFC to the detriment of new hires, but not towards people already in the system).
It's been close to a decade now, but I remember some higher-ups at work talking about some applicants and they were commenting negatively on all the employment gaps many had from 2007-2014ish. It literally did not occur to them how awful the legal job market was during those years and that even good candidates might have some gaps.
He's roped me into attending a single's event at some exclusive London club. He told me they put stickers on phone cameras and keep naked women in cages downstairs plus bona fide BDSM nuns of uncertain denomination(this is not a joke). The whole place isn't quite Eyes Wide Shut,
Is the password "oooorrrrggyyyy?"
It is part of my job on a regular basis
Same, but that means I'm getting paid for it. Watching them in my free time would be a different thing, although watching curated bits of the highlights (or lowlights, really) would be more interesting than watching the nth hour of bored cop doing something unremarkable.
From Steve Sailer: “The most heartfelt articles by female journalists tend to be demands that social values be overturned in order that, Come the Revolution, the journalist herself will be considered hotter-looking.”
My wife and I watch bodycam videos all the time
Any particular reason for this?
It's been at least a year since I've had to read any caselaw
This is one of my "complaining about the kids these days" hobbyhorses: in criminal defense, there is a reason to be searching caselaw almost every day. Huge amounts of constitutional disputes revolve around tiny factual differences and finding caselaw with the most similar factual similarities and arguing by analogy why those should control instead of the cases favoring the State is the name of the game.
Being able to say to a prosecutor "here are 3 opinions with similar fact patterns and here's why I'm going to win a suppression hearing" is the best move towards a better plea offer (even if the argument is mostly bluster). Maybe the research leads to 0 and it's time for hard talk with the client that they have zero legal issues to stand on. Either way, that exact issue shouldn't need to be researched from scratch in the future and it should be incorporated as base-level knowledge for future cases.
There are plenty of areas of law where changes are slow and caselaw searches aren't crucial, like you say yours is. Criminal defense is not one, especially in more populous states where new decisions on criminal issues are a constant thing. And I cannot get newer attorneys to do caselaw searches. No matter how many times I hear, "I have a case with fact pattern Z, what do you think?" and respond with "I don't know, what caselaw have you found with something similar?," I keep getting blank stares like research never occurs to them. And research could not be easier now compared to the paper days of Shepard cites, or even the early 2000s electronic options.
This is not isolated to my office. I hear the same thing from other defense friends who have become supervisors or mentors. Plus it's merely one facet of the unwillingness to do work overall. Coupled with the overall dearth of candidates (something DA offices are contending with, too), it makes for frustrating times.
I was not actually being sarcastic, although I can see how it might appear so. I took note of his mod statement and tried to make a plain statement of information I'll include in the future to provide context and not run afoul of a red tag again.
Does anyone else feel guilt over not working the full 8 hours in a laptop job?
Mostly I feel bored and that I'm wasting my life on the days I don't put in a solid day of work. Why be here and put up with all the nonsense of being in an office if I'm not actually accomplishing something? I'd be better off doing a solid 4 and going home, but that's not an option.
Exactly! But there is a weird BoomerCon rose-colored-glasses rembrance of the 1980s nonetheless.
Based on the boomercon rose-tinted remembrance of the 80s and the boomerlib ability to trace every modern ill to something Reagan did (military spending and mental health funding for the two most common, but for a way out of left field example, my boomer father recently complained that all these airport troubles really started with Reagan breaking the Air Traffic Controller Union), there is apparently a point in one's mid-30s-to-mid-40s where the mind decides that's where all modern good/bad things stem from. For the boomers, all modern domestic issues can be traced to Reagan (international diplomacy is still Hitler-centered). It's going to be fascinating to see where millennials end up fixated when they reach their 70s. Will it be Obama or Trump?
Noted. I will be more detailed next time and also make it clear that such comments are drawing on my getting-way-too-close-to-20-years of defense practice, sitting through mandatory Continuing Legal Education courses stuffed to the seams with lefty identitarian terminology, and watching new law grads wash out of PD work.
It's better to be able to pick clients and then take on a few pro bono cases to feel better about it.
They don't even do this. They want to go to work for NGOs and be "activists" and "raise awareness" and attend zoom meetings talking about white supremacy. Writing motions and appearing in court and doing jail visits and arguing with prosecutors and dealing with hostile judges? That's, like, hard work.
- Prev
- Next

Okay
BoomerMethuselahMore options
Context Copy link